Azure Security BenchmarkUK Cyber Essentials

Azure Security Benchmark covers 55.6% of UK Cyber Essentials

20 of the 36 controls in UK Cyber Essentials are already satisfied by evidence you collected for Azure Security Benchmark. 16 are genuine gaps. Every claim below was judged against both control sets and then argued against; the ones that did not survive are published further down with the reason each failed.

55.6%
of the target already covered
20
controls evidenced
16
genuine gaps
0
claims rejected in review

This number is directional. It says how much of UK Cyber Essentials your Azure Security Benchmark evidence satisfies. The reverse pair is a different number, often very different, because a security standard has enormous depth for access control and almost none for lawful basis or data subject rights.

62 candidate mappings were examined and 0 were removed. Signed off 2026-08-19, review level machine verified. Mappings were judged by Claude Code rather than read line by line by a practitioner. Every claim shows its reasoning so you can check it. Ask and a practitioner will review this pair.

Where the gaps are

Coverage is never evenly spread. A source standard usually satisfies one part of a target almost completely and barely touches another, and which part is which is the thing worth knowing before you plan the work.

Malware Protection4 of 4 evidenced
User Access Control6 of 8 evidenced, 2 to do
Firewalls4 of 7 evidenced, 3 to do
Security Update Management2 of 5 evidenced, 3 to do
Secure Configuration3 of 9 evidenced, 6 to do
Scope1 of 3 evidenced, 2 to do

Theme level, not control level, deliberately. The per-control list of what is evidenced and what is a gap is the report itself, so publishing it here would be publishing the thing being sold.

Claims that held

A sample. Each one names the control whose evidence does the work, the control it satisfies, and why.

ASB v3 IM-1CE-AC.2argued against and upheld
Authenticate Users Before Granting Access

A central identity system authenticating users with unique accounts before access is this control.

ASB v3 PA-3CE-AC.3argued against and upheld
Remove or Disable Accounts When No Longer Required

Leaver and role change handling removes or disables accounts no longer required.

ASB v3 PA-1CE-AC.4argued against and upheld
Privileged Account Approval and Tracking

Limiting and separating privileged accounts with documented role assignments is this control.

ASB v3 PA-6CE-AC.5argued against and upheld
Separate Admin Accounts for Administrative Activities

Privileged access workstations keep administration off general purpose email and browsing environments.

ASB v3 PA-1CE-AC.5argued against and upheld
Separate Admin Accounts for Administrative Activities

Separate dedicated administrative accounts is exactly this requirement.

ASB v3 PA-4CE-AC.6argued against and upheld
Periodic Review of Privileged Access

Regular review and reconciliation of privileged entitlements is this control directly.

ASB v3 IM-2CE-AC.7argued against and upheld
MFA for Administrative Accounts

Requiring strong authentication for privileged roles is exactly this requirement.

ASB v3 IM-6CE-AC.7argued against and upheld
MFA for Administrative Accounts

Enforced phishing resistant multi factor authentication covers administrative accounts.

Claims that did not hold

Nothing proposed for this pair was rejected in review. That is unusual and worth knowing rather than hiding: it means the candidate set was small and every candidate held.

The full report

Everything above is a sample. The report is every evidenced control and every gap, with the reasoning and the source document behind each one, in a form you can hand to an assessor. $299, emailed immediately.

Buy this crosswalk